12154 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 49 / Monday, March 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—SERVICE INFORMATION

Applicable airplanes Bombardier service information Revision Date 

Model CL–600–2B19 airplanes ....................................... Bombardier Modification Summary Package 

IS601R52110030.

A1 .......... April 24, 2009. 

Model CL–600–2C10, CL–600–2D15, and CL–600– 

2D24 airplanes.

Bombardier Modification Summary Package 

IS67052110074.

A1 .......... April 24, 2009. 

(4) Inspections and modifications 

accomplished before the effective date of this 

AD according to Bombardier Modification 

Summary Package IS601R52110030, Revision 

A, dated July 5, 2006; or IS67052110074, 

Revision A, dated July 5, 2006; as applicable; 

are considered acceptable for compliance 

with the corresponding inspection or 

modification specified in this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: 

The MCAI does not require an inspection 

or application of a corrosion inhibitor 

compound. This AD requires both actions. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(h) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), ANE–170, FAA, 

has the authority to approve AMOCs for this 

AD, if requested using the procedures found 

in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: 

Program Manager, Continuing Operational 

Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart 

Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York, 

11590; telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516– 

794–5531. Before using any approved AMOC 

on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your principal maintenance inspector 

(PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI), 

as appropriate, or lacking a principal 

inspector, your local Flight Standards District 

Office. The AMOC approval letter must 

specifically reference this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(i) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness 

Directive CF–2009–23, dated May 19, 2009, 

and the Bombardier modification summary 

packages listed in Table 1 of this AD, for 

related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington on March 4, 

2010. 

Suzanne Masterson, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–5515 Filed 3–12–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0225; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–203–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Short 

Brothers PLC Model SD3 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above that would 

supersede an existing AD. This 

proposed AD results from mandatory 

continuing airworthiness information 

(MCAI) originated by an aviation 

authority of another country to identify 

and correct an unsafe condition on an 

aviation product. The MCAI describes 

the unsafe condition as: 

Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel 

Tank System explosions in flight * * * and 

on ground, * * * Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation 88 (SFAR88) * * * required a 

safety review of the aircraft Fuel Tank 

System * * *. 

* * * * * 

Fuel Airworthiness Limitations are items 

arising from a systems safety analysis that 

have been shown to have failure mode(s) 

associated with an ‘unsafe condition’ * * *. 

These are identified in Failure Conditions for 

which an unacceptable probability of ignition 

risk could exist if specific tasks and/or 

practices are not performed in accordance 

with the manufacturers’ requirements. 

* * * * * 

The proposed AD would require 

actions that are intended to address the 

unsafe condition described in the MCAI. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by April 29, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–40, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Short 

Brothers PLC, Airworthiness, P.O. Box 

241, Airport Road, Belfast, BT3 9DZ 

Northern Ireland; telephone +44(0)2890

–462469; fax +44(0)2890–468444; e-mail 

michael.mulholland@aero.

bombardier.com; Internet http:// 

www.bombardier.com. You may review 

copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221 

or 425–227–1152. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 49 / Monday, March 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 12155 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2010–0225; Directorate Identifier 

2009–NM–203–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We have lengthened the 30-day 

comment period for proposed ADs that 

address MCAI originated by aviation 

authorities of other countries to provide 

adequate time for interested parties to 

submit comments. The comment period 

for these proposed ADs is now typically 

45 days, which is consistent with the 

comment period for domestic transport 

ADs. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

On June 5, 2006, we issued AD 2006– 

12–18, Amendment 39–14644 (71 FR 

34801, June 16, 2006). That AD required 

actions intended to address an unsafe 

condition on the products listed above. 

Since we issued AD 2006–12–18, we 

have determined that additional 

limitations for fuel tank systems and 

Critical Design Control Configuration 

Limitations (CDCCLs) are necessary. 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA 

Airworthiness Directive 2006–0198, 

dated July 11, 2006 (referred to after this 

as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to correct an unsafe 

condition for the specified products. 

The MCAI states: 

Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel 

Tank System explosions in flight * * * and 

on ground, the FAA published Special 

Federal Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR88) in 

June 2001. SFAR 88 required a safety review 

of the aircraft Fuel Tank System to determine 

that the design meets the requirements of 

FAR [Federal Aviation Regulation] § 25.901 

and § 25.981(a) and (b). 

A similar regulation has been 

recommended by the JAA [Joint Aviation 

Authorities] to the European National 

Aviation Authorities in JAA letter 04/00/02/ 

07/03–L024 of 3 February 2003. The review 

was requested to be mandated by NAA’s 

[National Airworthiness Authorities] using 

JAR [Joint Aviation Requirement] § 25.901(c), 

§ 25.1309. 

In August 2005 EASA published a policy 

statement on the process for developing 

instructions for maintenance and inspection 

of Fuel Tank System ignition source 

prevention (EASA D 2005/CPRO, 

www.easa.eu.int/home/ 

cert_policy_statements_en.html) that also 

included the EASA expectations with regard 

to compliance times of the corrective actions 

on the unsafe and the not unsafe part of the 

harmonised design review results. On a 

global scale the TC [type certificate] holders 

committed themselves to the EASA 

published compliance dates (see EASA 

policy statement). The EASA policy 

statement has been revised in March 2006: 

the date of 31–12–2005 for the unsafe related 

actions has now been set at 01–07–2006. 

Fuel Airworthiness Limitations are items 

arising from a systems safety analysis that 

have been shown to have failure mode(s) 

associated with an ‘unsafe condition’ as 

defined in FAA’s memo 2003–112–15 ‘SFAR 

88—Mandatory Action Decision Criteria’. 

These are identified in Failure Conditions for 

which an unacceptable probability of ignition 

risk could exist if specific tasks and/or 

practices are not performed in accordance 

with the manufacturers’ requirements. 

This EASA Airworthiness Directive 

mandates the Fuel System Airworthiness 

Limitations, comprising maintenance/ 

inspection tasks and Critical Design Control 

Configuration Limitations (CDCCL) for the 

type of aircraft, that resulted from the design 

reviews and the JAA recommendation and 

EASA policy statement mentioned above. 

Revision History: PAD [proposed 

airworthiness directive] 06–018R1 has been 

issued to endorse comments received for 

PAD 06–018 and due to the change of the 

EASA policy statement on fuel tank safety on 

March 2006. 

You may obtain further information by 

examining the MCAI in the AD docket. 

The FAA has examined the 

underlying safety issues involved in fuel 

tank explosions on several large 

transport airplanes, including the 

adequacy of existing regulations, the 

service history of airplanes subject to 

those regulations, and existing 

maintenance practices for fuel tank 

systems. As a result of those findings, 

we issued a regulation titled ‘‘Transport 

Airplane Fuel Tank System Design 

Review, Flammability Reduction and 

Maintenance and Inspection 

Requirements’’ (66 FR 23086, May 7, 

2001). In addition to new airworthiness 

standards for transport airplanes and 

new maintenance requirements, this 

rule included Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation No. 88 (‘‘SFAR 88,’’ 

Amendment 21–78, and subsequent 

Amendments 21–82 and 21–83). 

Among other actions, SFAR 88 

requires certain type design (i.e., type 

certificate (TC) and supplemental type 

certificate (STC)) holders to substantiate 

that their fuel tank systems can prevent 

ignition sources in the fuel tanks. This 

requirement applies to type design 

holders for large turbine-powered 

transport airplanes and for subsequent 

modifications to those airplanes. It 

requires them to perform design reviews 

and to develop design changes and 

maintenance procedures if their designs 

do not meet the new fuel tank safety 

standards. As explained in the preamble 

to the rule, we intended to adopt 

airworthiness directives to mandate any 

changes found necessary to address 

unsafe conditions identified as a result 

of these reviews. 

In evaluating these design reviews, we 

have established four criteria intended 

to define the unsafe conditions 

associated with fuel tank systems that 

require corrective actions. The 

percentage of operating time during 

which fuel tanks are exposed to 

flammable conditions is one of these 

criteria. The other three criteria address 

the failure types under evaluation: 

single failures, single failures in 

combination with a latent condition(s), 

and in-service failure experience. For all 

four criteria, the evaluations included 

consideration of previous actions taken 

that may mitigate the need for further 

action. 

The Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) 

issued a regulation that is similar to 

SFAR 88. Under that regulation, the JAA 

stated that all members of the European 

Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) that 

hold type certificates for transport 

category airplanes are required to 

conduct a design review against 

explosion risks. 

We have determined that the actions 

identified in this AD are necessary to 

reduce the potential of ignition sources 

inside fuel tanks, which, in combination 

with flammable fuel vapors, could result 

in fuel tank explosions and consequent 

loss of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

Bombardier has issued the temporary 

revisions (TRs) listed in the following 

table. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
12156 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 49 / Monday, March 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

AMM TEMPORARY REVISIONS

Model— Bombardier temporary revision— Dated— To the AMM— 

SD3–60 airplanes .................... TR360–AMM–55 ..................... November 11, 2005 ................ Bombardier SD3–60 AMM, 360/MM 

SD3–60. 

SD3–60 airplanes .................... TR360–AMM–56 ..................... November 11, 2005 ................ Bombardier SD3–60 AMM, 360/MM 

SD3–60. 

The actions described in this service 

information are intended to correct the 

unsafe condition identified in the 

MCAI. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of this Proposed AD 

This product has been approved by 

the aviation authority of another 

country, and is approved for operation 

in the United States. Pursuant to our 

bilateral agreement with the State of 

Design Authority, we have been notified 

of the unsafe condition described in the 

MCAI and service information 

referenced above. We are proposing this 

AD because we evaluated all pertinent 

information and determined an unsafe 

condition exists and is likely to exist or 

develop on other products of the same 

type design. 

Differences Between This AD and the 

MCAI or Service Information 

We have reviewed the MCAI and 

related service information and, in 

general, agree with their substance. But 

we might have found it necessary to use 

different words from those in the MCAI 

to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. 

operators and is enforceable. In making 

these changes, we do not intend to differ 

substantively from the information 

provided in the MCAI and related 

service information. 

We might also have proposed 

different actions in this AD from those 

in the MCAI in order to follow FAA 

policies. Any such differences are 

highlighted in a Note within the 

proposed AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this proposed AD would 

affect about 54 products of U.S. registry. 

The actions that are required by AD 

2006–12–18 and retained in this 

proposed AD take about 41 work-hours 

per product, at an average labor rate of 

$85 per work hour. Required parts cost 

about $10 per product. Based on these 

figures, the estimated cost of the 

currently required actions is $3,495 per 

product. 

We estimate that it would take about 

1 work-hour per product to comply with 

the new basic requirements of this 

proposed AD. The average labor rate is 

$85 per work-hour. Based on these 

figures, we estimate the cost of the 

proposed AD on U.S. operators to be 

$4,590, or $85 per product. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing Amendment 39–14644 (71 FR 

34801, June 16, 2006) and adding the 

following new AD: 

Short Brothers PLC: Docket No. FAA–2010– 

0225; Directorate Identifier 2009–NM– 

203–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by April 29, 

2010. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2006–12–18, 

Amendment 39–14644. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to all Short Brothers 

PLC Model SD3–60 SHERPA, SD3–SHERPA, 

SD3–30, and SD3–60 airplanes, certificated 

in any category. 

Note 1: This AD requires revisions to 

certain operator maintenance documents to 

include new inspections. Compliance with 

these inspections is required by 14 CFR 

91.403(c). For airplanes that have been 

previously modified, altered, or repaired in 

the areas addressed by these inspections, the 

operator may not be able to accomplish the 

inspections described in the revisions. In this 

situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), 

the operator must request approval for an 

alternative method of compliance according 

to paragraph (l) of this AD. The request 

should include a description of changes to 

the required inspections that will ensure the 

continued damage tolerance of the affected 

structure. The FAA has provided guidance 

for this determination in Advisory Circular 

(AC) 25–1529. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 49 / Monday, March 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 12157 

Subject 

(d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 28: Fuel. 

Reason 

(e) The mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) states: 

Subsequent to accidents involving Fuel 

Tank System explosions in flight * * * and 

on ground, the FAA published Special 

Federal Aviation Regulation 88 (SFAR88) in 

June 2001. SFAR 88 required a safety review 

of the aircraft Fuel Tank System to determine 

that the design meets the requirements of 

FAR [Federal Aviation Regulation] § 25.901 

and § 25.981(a) and (b). 

A similar regulation has been 

recommended by the JAA [Joint Aviation 

Authorities] to the European National 

Aviation Authorities in JAA letter 04/00/02/ 

07/03–L024 of 3 February 2003. The review 

was requested to be mandated by NAA’s 

[National Airworthiness Authorities] using 

JAR [Joint Aviation Requirement] § 25.901(c), 

§ 25.1309. 

In August 2005 EASA [European Aviation 

Safety Agency] published a policy statement 

on the process for developing instructions for 

maintenance and inspection of Fuel Tank 

System ignition source prevention (EASA D 

2005/CPRO, www.easa.eu.int/home/ 

cert_policy_statements_en.html) that also 

included the EASA expectations with regard 

to compliance times of the corrective actions 

on the unsafe and the not unsafe part of the 

harmonised design review results. On a 

global scale the TC [type certificate] holders 

committed themselves to the EASA 

published compliance dates (see EASA 

policy statement). The EASA policy 

statement has been revised in March 2006: 

the date of 31–12–2005 for the unsafe related 

actions has now been set at 01–07–2006. 

Fuel Airworthiness Limitations are items 

arising from a systems safety analysis that 

have been shown to have failure mode(s) 

associated with an ‘unsafe condition’ as 

defined in FAA’s memo 2003–112–15 ‘SFAR 

88—Mandatory Action Decision Criteria’. 

These are identified in Failure Conditions for 

which an unacceptable probability of ignition 

risk could exist if specific tasks and/or 

practices are not performed in accordance 

with the manufacturers’ requirements. 

This EASA Airworthiness Directive 

mandates the Fuel System Airworthiness 

Limitations, comprising maintenance/ 

inspection tasks and Critical Design Control 

Configuration Limitations (CDCCL) for the 

type of aircraft, that resulted from the design 

reviews and the JAA recommendation and 

EASA policy statement mentioned above. 

Revision History: PAD [proposed 

airworthiness directive] 06–018R1 has been 

issued to endorse comments received for 

PAD 06–018 and due to the change of the 

EASA policy statement on fuel tank safety on 

March 2006. 

Compliance 

(f) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2006– 

12–18, With Revised Service Information 

Revision of Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) 

With Additional AFM References in Table 1 

of This AD 

(g) Within 30 days after July 21, 2006 (the 

effective date of AD 2006–12–18), revise the 

Limitations and Normal Procedures sections 

of the AFMs as specified in Table 1 of this 

AD to include the information in the 

applicable Shorts advance amendment 

bulletins as specified in Table 1 of this AD. 

The advance amendment bulletins address 

operation during icing conditions and fuel 

system failures. Thereafter, operate the 

airplane according to the limitations and 

procedures in the applicable advance 

amendment bulletin. 

Note 2: The requirements of paragraph (g) 

of this AD may be done by inserting a copy 

of the applicable advance amendment 

bulletin into the AFM. When the applicable 

advance amendment bulletin has been 

included in general revisions of the AFM, the 

general revisions may be inserted into the 

AFM and the advance amendment bulletin 

may be removed, provided the relevant 

information in the general revision is 

identical to that in the advance amendment 

bulletin. 

TABLE 1—AFM REVISIONS

Airplane model— Shorts advance amendment bulletin— AFM— 

SD3–30 airplanes .............................................. 1/2004, dated July 13, 2004 .................................... SBH.3.2, SBH.3.3, SBH.3.6, SBH.3.7, 

SBH.3.8, and SB.3.9. 

SD3–60 airplanes .............................................. 1/2004, dated July 13, 2004 .................................... SB.4.3, SB.4.6, and SB.4.8. 

SD3–60 SHERPA airplanes .............................. 1/2004, dated July 13, 2004 .................................... SB.5.2 or 6.2. 

SD3–SHERPA airplanes ................................... 1/2004, dated July 13, 2004 .................................... SB.6.2 or 5.2. 

Revision of Airworthiness Limitation (AWL) 

Section 

(h) Within 180 days after July 21, 2006: 

Revise the AWL section of the Instructions 

for Continued Airworthiness by 

incorporating airplane maintenance manual 

(AMM) Sections 5–20–01 and 5–20–02 as 

introduced by the Shorts temporary revisions 

(TR) specified in Table 2 of this AD into the 

AWL section of the AMMs for the airplane 

models specified in Table 2 of this AD, 

except as required by paragraph (j) of this 

AD. Thereafter, except as provided by 

paragraph (l)(1) of this AD, no alternative 

structural inspection intervals may be 

approved for the longitudinal skin joints in 

the fuselage pressure shell. 

Note 3: The requirements of paragraph (h) 

of this AD may be done by inserting a copy 

of the applicable TR into the applicable 

AMM. When the TR has been included in 

general revisions of the AMM, the general 

revisions may be inserted in the AMM and 

the TR may be removed, provided the 

relevant information in the general revision 

is identical to that in the TR. 

TABLE 2—AMM TEMPORARY REVISIONS

Airplane model— Temporary revision— Dated— AMM— 

SD3–30 airplanes .............................. TR330–AMM–13 ............................... June 21, 2004 ................................... SD3–30 AMM. 

SD3–30 airplanes .............................. TR330–AMM–14 ............................... June 21, 2004 ................................... SD3–30 AMM. 

SD3–60 airplanes .............................. TR360–AMM–33 ............................... July 27, 2004 .................................... SD3–60 AMM. 

SD3–60 airplanes .............................. TR360–AMM–34 ............................... July 27, 2004 .................................... SD3–60 AMM. 

SD3–60 SHERPA airplanes .............. TRSD360S–AMM–14 ....................... July 29, 2004 .................................... SD3–60 SHERPA AMM. 

SD3–60 SHERPA airplanes .............. TRSD360S–AMM–15 ....................... July 29, 2004 .................................... SD3–60 SHERPA AMM. 

SD3–SHERPA airplanes .................... TRSD3S–AMM–15 ........................... July 28, 2004 .................................... SD3 SHERPA AMM. 

SD3–SHERPA airplanes .................... TRSD3S–AMM–16 ........................... July 28, 2004 .................................... SD3 SHERPA AMM. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
12158 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 49 / Monday, March 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Resistance Check, Inspection, and Jumper 

Installation 

(i) Within 180 days after July 21, 2006: 

Perform the insulation resistance check, 

general visual inspections, and bonding 

jumper wire installations; in accordance with 

Shorts Service Bulletin SD330–28–37, 

SD360–28–23, SD360 SHERPA–28–3, or SD3 

SHERPA–28–2; all dated June 2004; as 

applicable. If any defect or damage is 

discovered during any inspection or check 

required by this AD, before further flight, 

repair the defect or damage using a method 

approved by the Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA; the Civil Aviation 

Authority (CAA) (or its delegated agent); or 

EASA (or its delegated agent). 

Note 4: For the purposes of this AD, a 

general visual inspection is: ‘‘A visual 

examination of an interior or exterior area, 

installation, or assembly to detect obvious 

damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of 

inspection is made from within touching 

distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror 

may be necessary to ensure visual access to 

all surfaces in the inspection area. This level 

of inspection is made under normally 

available lighting conditions such as 

daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or 

droplight and may require removal or 

opening of access panels or doors. Stands, 

ladders, or platforms may be required to gain 

proximity to the area being checked.’’ 

New Requirements of This AD 

Actions and Compliance 

Revision of AWL Section: New Limitations 

and CDCCLs 

(j) Within 90 days after the effective date 

of this AD: Revise the AWL section of the 

Instructions for Continued Airworthiness by 

incorporating aircraft maintenance manual 

(AMM) Sections 5–20–01 and 5–20–02 as 

introduced by the Bombardier temporary 

revisions (TRs) specified in Table 3 of this 

AD into the AWL section of the AMMs for 

the airplane models specified in Table 3 of 

this AD. Doing this revision terminates the 

requirement to incorporate Shorts TRs 

TR360–AMM–33, dated July 27, 2004; and 

TR360–AMM–34, dated July 27, 2004; 

specified in paragraph (h) of this AD. After 

doing this revision, TR360–AMM–33, dated 

July 27, 2004; and TR360–AMM–34, dated 

July 27, 2004; required by paragraph (h) of 

this AD may be removed. 

TABLE 3—AMM TEMPORARY REVISIONS

Model— Bombardier temporary revision— Dated— To this AMM— 

SD3–60 airplanes ......................... TR360–AMM–55 .......................... November 11, 2005 ..................... Bombardier SD3–60 AMM, 360/MM. 

SD3–60 airplanes ......................... TR360–AMM–56 .......................... November 11, 2005 ..................... Bombardier SD3–60 AMM, 360/MM. 

Note 5: The requirements of paragraph (j) 

of this AD may be done by inserting a copy 

of the applicable TR into the applicable 

AMM. When the TR has been included in 

general revisions of the AMM, the general 

revisions may be inserted in the AMM and 

the TR may be removed, provided the 

relevant information in the general revision 

is identical to that in the TR. 

(k) After accomplishing the actions 

specified in paragraph (j) of this AD, no 

alternative inspections, inspection intervals, 

or CDCCLs may be used unless the 

inspections, intervals, or CDCCLs are 

approved as an alternative method of 

compliance (AMOC), in accordance with the 

procedures specified in paragraph (l) of this 

AD. 

Explanation of CDCCL Requirements 

Note 6: Notwithstanding any other 

maintenance or operational requirements, 

components that have been identified as 

airworthy or installed on the affected 

airplanes before the revision of the AMM, as 

required by paragraph (h) or (j) of this AD, 

do not need to be reworked in accordance 

with the CDCCLs. However, once the AMM 

has been revised, future maintenance actions 

on these components must be done in 

accordance with the CDCCLs. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 7: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: No 

differences. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(l) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Send information to ATTN: Todd Thompson, 

Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

227–1175; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using 

any approved AMOC on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, notify your 

principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or 

principal avionics inspector (PAI), as 

appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, 

your local Flight Standards District Office. 

The AMOC approval letter must specifically 

reference this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(m) Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness 

Directive 2006–0198, dated July 11, 2006; 

Shorts Service Bulletins SD330–28–37, 

SD360–28–23, SD360 SHERPA–28–3, and 

SD3 SHERPA–28–2, all dated June 2004; and 

the service information listed in Tables 1, 2, 

and 3 of this AD; for related information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 4, 

2010. 

Suzanne Masterson, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–5516 Filed 3–12–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0222; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–NM–012–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; BAE 

SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Model 

Avro 146–RJ and BAe 146 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

A potential fleet wide problem has been 

identified regarding the interchanging of 

wing links on all BAe 146 & AVRO 146–RJ 

aircraft during scheduled maintenance. Some 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS